Is Cancer Really What We Think It Is?

with cancer rates ever increasing i thought this was a good article to share with the community.

lets commence shall we?

Ever since Richard Nixon declared a war on cancer in 1971 through the signing of the National Cancer Act, over a hundred billion dollars has
been spent by our government on research and drug development in an attempt to eradicate the disease, with trillions more spent by the cancer patients
themselves, but with disappointing results. Even after four decades of waging full-scale conventional (surgery and chemo) and nuclear (radiotherapy)
war against cancer, close to one in every four Americans will be diagnosed with the disease within their lifetimes. Could this colossal failure
reflect how profoundly misunderstood the condition is, and misguided are our attempts to prevent and treat it?

very true.

allthough some of you might argue that cures for cancer have been found but have been purposefully bought it, marganilezed and demonized in typical
fashion.

The time has come to shift the conceptual framework away from the idea that cancer is something bad that happens to the body, to something the
body does in order to survive vis-à-vis an increasingly toxic and nutrient-deprived environment. Only then we will begin to unravel the
mystery behind the colossal failure of the conventional medical system and why the ‘war against cancer’ will only be successful when we embrace
our enemy with greater compassion and understanding, instead of blasting it (and ourselves) into oblivion.

underlining mine.

this is not the first time i've read that a good nutrition and diet is the first step to avoiding cancer.

yet with all of Monsanto's frankenfood, the overall decline in food nutrition and harder and harder regulations.

it becomes quite hard to get your daily dose of vitamins and minderals.

For the past half century, the “Mutational Theory” has provided the prevailing explanation for the cause of most cancers, where, as the story
goes, accumulated mutations to the DNA within the nucleus of our cells lead some to “go berserk,” their “insane” behavior a result of multiple
destructive events to the intelligent code within the cell (DNA) that keep them acting in a ‘civilized’ manner relative to the larger bodily
whole. In this view, these rogue cells clone themselves inordinately, spreading outward in a characteristically cancerous manner (cancer = Greek for
“crab”), not unlike the characteristics of an infectious process within the host, eventually obstructing vital processes, resulting in morbidity
and death. One paper summarizes this view as follows:

Cancer is derived from a single somatic cell that has accumulated multiple DNA mutations.

The default state of cell proliferation in metazoan (animal life) is quiescence

Cancer is a disease of cell proliferation caused by mutations in genes that control proliferation and the cell cycle.

The problem with this view is that over 100 cancer-promoting genes (oncogenes) have already been discovered nested deep within our genome –
hardly a byproduct of chance mutation within individual cells. Proliferation may very well be the default state of all cells, and much of the behavior
of healthy, well-differentiated cells in higher animals is a regulatory overlay (suppressing ancient genes) on top of a far more ancient program which
becomes unmasked during carcinogenesis. Cancer, therefore, may be an “evolutionary throwback” to a time before we became multicellular organisms
and a more rudimentary type of cooperation between cells existed (i.e. tumor) which enabled them to survive in a dramatically different, and perhaps
far harsher environment.

Cancer cells are, in fact, surprisingly well-coordinated for cells that are supposed to be the result of strictly random mutation. They are capable of
building their own blood supply (angiogenesis), are able to defend themselves by silencing cancer-suppression genes, secreting corrosive enzymes to
move freely throughout the body, alter their metabolism to live in low oxygen and acidic environments, and know how to remove their own
surface-receptor proteins to escape detection by white blood cells. These complex behaviors, which involve the type of cooperation between cells which
is the very definition of Metazoan behavior (multicellularity, i.e. animal life), call into question the view that mutation within ‘rogue cells’
is the primary cause of cancer. What if cancer was the unmasking of a more ancient survival program within the cell, activated as a last ditch effort
to survive an increasingly hostile bodily environment, saturated through with carcinogenic and immunotoxic agents?

This new view may shed light on why chemotherapy and radiotherapy have such dismal track records. Tumors often contain a mixture of both highly
malignant and benign cell populations. The treatment may destroy the benign cells, releasing the “chemoresistant” and “radioresistant”
populations to wreak havoc on the body of the patient. Often treatment failure is attributed to the “treatment resistant” nature of the cancer,
when it is a direct result of the inherent toxicity and lack of effectiveness of the therapy being used. In the same way that antibiotics like
methicilin have spawned “super germs” like MRSA (Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus), conventional cancer treatment is often responsible
for generating greater resistance and subsequent malignancy within certain tumor populations.

The time has come to shift the conceptual framework away from the idea that cancer is something bad that happens to the body, to something the
body does in order to survive vis-à-vis an increasingly toxic and nutrient-deprived environment. ...

...In other words, cancer is not some predestined gene-time bomb setting itself off within us, rather, is the logical result of decades worth of cell
shock/damage/adaptation to environmental poisoning, nutrient deprivation and psycho-spiritual and/or emotional stress? These cells have learned to
survive the constant abuse, and have flipped into survival mode, which is self-centered, hyper-proliferative (constant self-repair/replication) and
aggressive (metastatic).

Instead of a monolithic “disease,” it makes more sense to view cancer as a symptom of a bodily milieu gone awry; in other words, the environment
of the cell has become inhospitable to normal cell function, and in order to survive, the cell undergoes profound genetic changes associated with the
cancerous personality (phenotype). This “ecological” view puts the center of focus back on the preventable and treatable causes of the
“disease,” rather on some vague and out-dated concept of “defective genes” beyond our ability influence directly. It also explains how the
“disease” process may conceal an inherent logic, if not also healing impulse, insofar as it is an attempt of the body to find balance and survive
in inherently unbalanced and dangerous conditions.

The time has come to shift the conceptual framework away from the idea that cancer is something bad that happens to the body, to something the
body does in order to survive vis-à-vis an increasingly toxic and nutrient-deprived environment

It is certainly wise to eat nutritional diets and lead a healthy life style, however, there have been people who have taken very good care of
themselves, ate healthy, exercised and did everything right who still got cancer. There are also people who have had horrible diets, didn't exercise
etc. and they lived long lives cancer free. Just saying.

Originally posted by Night Star
It is certainly wise to eat nutritional diets and lead a healthy life style, however, there have been people who have taken very good care of
themselves, ate healthy, exercised and did everything right who still got cancer. There are also people who have had horrible diets, didn't exercise
etc. and they lived long lives cancer free. Just saying.

it´s not a get not cancer free pass.

you can attract cancer through a lot of means.

our personal luxury´s like cellphones, tvs, monitors are just to name a few.

That's true. I wasn't thinking of those things. Well I had cancer recently and beat it anyway! Yay! It is a horrible and scary thing and happens to
too many people. Some are lucky like myself, others are not. Very sad.

That's true. I wasn't thinking of those things. Well I had cancer recently and beat it anyway! Yay! It is a horrible and scary thing and happens to
too many people. Some are lucky like myself, others are not. Very sad.

So glad to hear your doing well. It almost seems like an epidemic in the past few years. I'm 53 years old and honestly don't remember so many
being diagnosed as there have been in the past few years. When I was a child and growing up it was really rare to hear of someone dying of cancer.
Once in a great while maybe, and people smoked and drank then like today.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.